* Chris Lilley wrote:
>BH> which is expensive and unlikely to happen. In fact, a number
>BH> of deployed tools already don't do that, for example the W3C Markup
>BH> Validator would need to be updated with special code for image/svg+xml
>BH> in order to comply with the registration.
>
>Incorrect; see above.
The W3C Markup Validator considers resources such as
Content-Type: image/svg+xml;charset=iso-8859-1
<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
...
ISO-8859-1 encoded. If it is incorrect that the W3C Markup Validator
needs to change you either want that all processors treat the resource
ISO-8859-1 encoded in which case there is not really a point in not
allowing an optional charset parameter, or you want two classes of non-
interoperable processors, where some consider it ISO-8859-1 and others
consider it UTF-8. Which one is it?